Saturday, May 29, 2010

Movie Review: Sex and the City 2

Wow. Let me begin by saying this review has some intense spoilers. I need to provide specific examples from the film to illustrate some of my points and therefore I will reveal important plot elements. If you still want to have your SATC 2 experience preserved, then stop now. However, if you don't care about this rotting pile of dog shit that's masquerading as cinema, then carry on. You've been warned.

If you didn't gather from the first paragraph, this movie is horrific. Perhaps this is the result of a public high school education, but I cannot find the words to effectively describe how much this movie offends me. I'll try anyway: Insensitive. Meanderingly pointless. Overstuffed. Irrelevant. Dina Lohan. Brussel sprouts.

You get the idea. This film works overtime to stereotype and misrepresent many different demographics. I'll break things down to the three main groups that should be taken aback by the film. Also, the fashion in this film is grotesquely disappointing. I will point out various fashion faux pas as the film goes on.

The Gays

Yes, I'm starting with my people. I assume my blog has a fairly sizable gay audience, like SATC2, so therefore I assume it is fair for me to make overarching generalizations that perpetuate stereotypes, LIKE SATC 2.

1. GAYS LOVE LIZA!!!!!!!! In fact, Liza is such a gay icon, if there's a gay wedding she can sense it and just shows up.
2. Gays can only be successful in an open marriage. Fidelity is for heteros.
3. Since I'll never have kids, I will be able to save up enough money is a pretty well-paying job to have a wedding that would make Princess Diana's nuptials look like a fucking one-nighter in a Vegas chapel, overseen by a fat Elvis. I'll distract from this huge logical inconsistency by hiring a gay choir and OH LOOK DID I MENTION LIZA SHOWED UP?!?!? I'm sure her fee is reasonable...OH WAIT SHE DOESN'T HAVE ONE FOR THE GAYS!!!!!!
4. See my next category for the depiction of a gay muslim.
5. As long as there are only two major gay characters in the story of my life (me and one other), we'll eventually get together because trying to write a unique story line for me would require too much effort on the part of the writers. So even though this guy is my complete opposite and our union defies all reasonable explanation, it'll happen because without other gay options our intense need for sexual gratification will drive us together.
6. The bottom line is that the gays will serve as a vehicle for a lavish wedding that jumpstarts the plot. However in retrospect, this will have no relevant function except to allow our heroines to make some questionably tasteful and unfunny one-liners about gays.

I suppose there wasn't anything in the film that was overly offensive to the gays. Rather, there was a smugness in the film, as if the writers knew they could get away with gay humor because they knew there was a gay audience. I don't like that. So in order to achieve karmic retribution, I have a joke at the expense of a gay. Michael Patrick King, the show's creator, looks like a homo Keebler elf. I wonder what sort of fudge he's packing in that magical tree of his.


Fashion Faux Pas: Maybe a gay wedding legitimizes Carrie's decision to wear a tuxedo and heels, but nothing on God's earth legitimizes her decision to wear a hat that makes me wonder when her alien people are coming to earth to kill us all.


Omg you guys, the news totally has it wrong. The Middle East is a paradise, where everything is beautiful and perfect. If I didn't know anything, I'd say that Sex and the City 2 makes the Middle East, specifically Abu Dhabi, look like heaven. Just to show you how wrong the news is, I did a Google news search to see everything false that's happening there.

"Abu Dhabi Police delegation briefed on the latest crime scene training in the UK."
"Rape victims reluctant to go to the police"
"'Sex and the City' Sequel May Face Abu Dhabi Ban Amid Religion Fury."

Yes, the capitalization is inconsistent, but I just copied the headlines directly. None of these things were even hinted at in the movie, so clearly the news is full of shit and the movie is awesome. What sorts of things can you expect if you go to Abu Dhabi? Let me tell you!

1. Everyone in the Middle East is super kind, and even black market vendors have good hearts and will let you go if you don't like their goods. They might get indignant if they think you've stolen something, but that's a totally understandable source of confusion.
2. If a Muslim man makes a Paula Abdul reference, he's gay. But only if he's good looking.
3. Muslim women, although forced to wear burkas, are secretly super fashionable and wear designer clothes under their traditional garb. Yes, that's right. Muslim women spend thousands of dollars to import Dolce and Gabbana in order to secretly wear it under their burkas. Just in case you didn't hear me, Muslim women, according to Sex and the City 2, walk around in 113 degree desert temperature wearing all black burkas, which they've layered underneath with designer outfits. Somehow they manage to wear all of this fabric and not die of heat stroke. This is pretty magical, just like their magical ability to speak English out of nowhere.

Fashion Faux Pas: Just because you assume the Paula Abdul referencing Muslim is gay doesn't mean that he is. Therefore when you turn to him for some desert-sheik fashion advice, there are two possible explanations for why your outfits look like a clown's wardrobe exploded. One, he's not actually gay and therefore scientifically ineligible to give fashion advice. Two, he's gay and spiting you, because no matter who (or how oppressed), a gay will know good fashion.

This was the best I could do image wise, so hopefully you can see that they look like the dying visions of Bozo the Clown, if he had malaria.

EDIT: It has come to my attention that there have been some gripes about this portion of the review. I heard some grumblings a little while ago and let them go, but now that several people have complained to me I feel the need to say something. So I learned that Muslim women actually do wear designer clothes under their burkas. Well, I'm sorry for being so ignorant. I didn't know that. However, let me give a bit more context to help explain my incredulity.

1. It looked like the SATC girls were shopping in a really poor part of town. One vendor was missing teeth. Context clue.
2. They were saved by the Muslim women in that seemingly poor part of town. Therefore I made the assumption that the women in the poor part of town were also, themselves, poor. My b.
3. I then made the huge jump in logic to be surprised poor women spent assloads of money on nice clothes.

So, even though some rich Muslim women may wear nice things under those burkas, I still think SATC 2 is misrepresenting that part of their culture. Just a little. I mean, please leave comments to explain what else I might be missing. I would also make the logical assumption that everyone who felt the need to point out my logical fallacy actually watched SATC2, so they had the proper context to judge my comment and to make their own assertion. If someone commented without seeing the movie, well that's just silly.


After some thought, no matter how horribly the gays and Muslims are treated, nobody really gets it worse than women. Approximately 85% of the audience members in my theater were ladies, a statistic I assume holds pretty well for screenings across the nation. I also observed that most of the women seemed sort of sad and single. My theory? Most of those women were huge fans of the show, since it presented single life as something that was fun, even if it went into your 30s. It legitimized waiting to get married, which gave single women hope if they weren't tied down at age 26. It also was a brilliant commentary on the single condition, starring four talented actresses.

So, I can only feel pity for the women in the theater as they watched their beloved characters turn into shrill, harpy ladies that were now sad caricatures of themselves. Let's go character by character.


Along with Miranda, she had perhaps one of the less offensive story lines. Charlotte was struggling with being a new mother, because her girls were quite difficult and she had a nanny that was super super hot and often went braless. Since Charlotte has always been intent on maintaing a fairy-book lifestyle, she didn't air her complaints about motherhood until well into the movie. I think having issues with motherhood is a legitimate plot. Sadly, both Charlotte and Miranda were relegated to sidekick status. Neither of their stories really had time to develop, since the movie was intent on other, inferior stories. The one thing that bothered me the most was the resolution of the nanny storyline. Oh, Charlotte! You had nothing to worry about because your nanny was a lez. No risk of your husband cheating! Heaven forbid she just be a straight lady with a conscience.

Because of the lack of plot development, I assume the lesbian reveal went something like this. (Harry is Charlotte's husband)

Harry: Oh hay baby, can I play with dem fine ole tittays? Imma smack them around all night long.

Nanny: Um, no. I'm a lesbian. Sorry.

Harry: Oh, awkward. Well hooray now I can still stay faithful to my wife! She doesn't have to worry about anything happening!!

Nanny: Wait, but you just came on to me. Like, clearly you have unfaithful thoughts that you're willing to act on. Shouldn't this be a concern for your wife? Me being a lesbian doesn't solve the problems that are within you.

Harry: MARRIAGE. SAVED. Shut up.

And scene. I mean obviously this is just a random theory, but when you drop the lez bomb out of nowhere, then I feel entitled to use my imagination to fill in the blanks. To fit with the rest of the film, I chose an explanation that eschewed story structure and logic.


Poor Cynthia Nixon. Miranda really had no storyline. There were hints that she was being treated unfairly at her law firm, but there was absolutely no development or explanation. Naturally, Miranda used her lawyer logic to deduce that she was being mistreated because she was an outspoken WOMAN. I dunno, that seems awfully convenient. I wouldn't have minded a scene developing that, especially considering about 79% of the scenes in the ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY MINUTE MOVIE were pointless. Just out of fairness, I'll list some other possible explanations for why her boss didn't like her:

1. She does sloppy work
2. She shows up late
3. She loses a majority of her cases
4. She's a bad negotiator
5. She frequently makes passive aggressive comments about being mistreated as a woman, when that's actually not the case
6. Even though her salary is probably $300,000, she gripes when her boss asks her to earn her pay by putting a few extra hours on evenings and weekends. I dunno about you, but if I were making that money and my boss asked me to write an email over the weekend (even if I were at a lavish gay wedding) I would write the fucking email. Like instantly. And then feel grateful as I drive home in my Mercedes to my Upper East Side townhouse.

You see my point. I'm willing to believe that Miranda was being mistreated due to her women-ness, but only if the movie shows it.


Well, women over 50, clearly you have nothing to live for because you're going to dry up and be lonely forever. Samantha Jones seems to have come to this conclusion, so she spends most of the film working her hardest to stay young and beautiful. Since she bangs the hottest guy ever at the beginning of the film, clearly her strategy of taking as many vitamins and hormones as possible is working. In fact, even when she wears the same dress as Miley Cyrus to a film premiere (that she fails to pull off), her youth is maintained because Cyrus compliments her dress. Hooray! Menopause can be defeated!

OR CAN IT?!? When Samantha loses access to her vitamins in Abu Dhabi, she turns into a sweating, shriveled woman who only complains about her hot flashes. Clearly failing to take vitamins for one day would cause these consequences. To evidence how bad things have gotten for Samantha, the movie shows a scene of sweaty young men in speedos, all of whom fail to arouse Ms. Jones. Thanks, old vagina. You're useless. Luckily, Samantha meets a hot old guy.
Although the movie fails to connect the dots, I think the implication is that Samantha learns that she doesn't need to work so hard to stay young since she's found an attractive older man. However, the way it plays on screen makes it seem like this old guy just sort of plowed the menopause out of her.



I've saved the worst for last. Here's a picture of her out on the town:

Ok, so I recognize that it's not a legitimate film critique to call Sarah Jessica Parker ugly, even though she looks like a mixture of a horse/skeleton/vampire. Seriously, there was one close-up where she was getting ready for a date where I thought she was going to Medusa me.

Anyway, the fact that she's a big ugg-o shouldn't matter in the context of film criticism...but somehow it makes this movie even more unbelievable than it already is. Let me explain.


Yep, that's Carrie's drama in the film. She's unhappy with her paradise. To tie my two points together, if Carrie were played by a pretty actress, I'd find her complaints slightly more believable. But since she's a big fugmeister, I just wanted her to sit down and shut the fuck up. Her life is approximately 458 times better than mine. Just deal with it.

Fashion Faus Pas: HER FACE.

So overall this movie was awful. As a gay man, I don't know a lot about how women work. If SATC 2 were my guide, this is what I would have learned

1. Confident women can inspire an entire karaoke audience with a rendition of "I Am Woman," even if it's grating and off key. Even an audience in Abu Dhabi.
2. Women everywhere are obsessed with fashion, even if they live in a back corner of the Middle East.
3. When you reach a certain age, you might as well just give up because your body is going to fall apart.
4. If you cheat on your perfect husband with a guy that makes Matthew McConaughey sound brilliant, then you will be rewarded with a diamond ring from your husband after you confess your infidelity. Yeah, that actually happened.
5. Being a mother sucks, but it has some momentary joys. Fortunately, only women are affected by the pangs of parenthood because men clearly are not.
6. If ladies have gay friends, they're allowed to make insensitive comments about gays. Being associated with a gay proves you're tolerant, so you have free range with your words. Apparently we won't mind.
7. If you see a guy in Abu Dhabi that you find attractive, the sun actually heats up your vagina to the point where it sends out radiowaves to your brain that make you act crazy. Then you'll do things like forget your passport in the marketplace and not remember for days and days.
8. Did I mentioned that infidelity has no negative consequence? Yeah, I can't really emphasize that enough.

Sex and the City 2 effectively set women back thousands of years. Here's a look at women throughout history that are more effective feminists than these biyatches.

Look! She's wearing a suit of armor. This lady is going to fight in an olden timey war, which women at the time couldn't do. Trailblazer.

WELL I'LL BE DAMNED! There's a woman reading a book! Something Sex and the City 2 almost convinced me ladies couldn't do.

Yeah. Even fucking Heidi Montag gives women a better name.

Well, I can't write anymore or I will have a rage stroke. For the love of God do not see this movie. And ladies, if you bring your boyfriend, you'd better let him take a dump on your chest, because he's earned it.

Rating: 0/5 stars.

Thursday, May 27, 2010

Album Review: Bionic

Christina: Hay guys, it's time for a new CD!!!

Label: Alright, great. You have one of the most powerful voices in the industry, I'm sure people are dying to hear you use it on new material.

Christina: Fuck you. I do what I want.

Label: Um ok, I was trying to be nice. What sort of theme/effect do you want on this cd?

Chrsitina: One second, phone call...Hello? Oh hi baby boy, it's mommy! Are you having fun with daddy today? Who's my special son? You are! You are! You are! I love you so much and tell daddy I miss him...Anyway, to answer your question about my cd, I want it to be about NASTY SEX!

Label: Um, is that something you want your son to hear?

Christina: I. DO. WHAT. I. WANT. BITCH.

Label: Right-o. So, any other ideas?

Christina: Well, I'm thinking that I want to do an interlude that features my husband talking to my child. And two songs before that I want a stank song about some dude plowing me nasty.

Label: Um. Ok...


Label: This really doesn't seem appropriate. I'm just thinking about your child and everything.

Christina: Well, what if we make zero of the songs catchy? That way, if there's anything offensive on the cd it won't be memorable enough to stick in people's minds?

Label: Alright, now you're thinking. Let's do this!!

And scene. So Bionic is a decent cd, but very few songs stick out in my mind. It's awkwardly sexual, because Christina is a mom now AND we're reminded of that fact by the presence of her child in one of the disc's interludes. Sorry that I don't want to hear about your dripping vag and momentarily be reminded that your vag just shot out a baby. That makes me ill.

All this being said, none of the songs on this cd are terrible. It's an entirely pleasant, albeit sexually awkward listen. It's sort of like watching SVU. You're interested in the moment, but the episode never sticks with you...and it's sort of off-putting because it's about clown rape or something.

I would also like to take this time to address a bit of controversy regarding Lady Gaga and Christina and how people think Christina is stealing from Gaga. It's completely justified. Every single thing about Lady Gaga is 100% unique and original. She has absolutely zero outside influences, from her non-Queen inspired name to her revolutionary Red One produced single, Just Dance. I can't think of any other female artists that have tackled the subject of dancing. Her music videos are outrageous and controversial, especially the one with the burning crosses and black Jesus. Her fashion is bold and she doesn't apologize for who she is. Hell, I'm so proud of Gaga's uniqueness that I'm going to post a picture in tribute. The one. The only. The original. Lady Gaga.

Rating: 3/5 stars.

Sunday, May 23, 2010

TV Review: The Lost Finale

Lost is over, and I'm still sort of numb from the experience. I've given a great deal of thought to the finale, and I think I've come up with some poignant things to say about this six year journey. You see, we've followed these characters through situations both uplifting and difficult, heartbreaking and inspiring. The finale made a profound and powerful statement about the the experiences of our heroes. After devoting almost all of the work day towards thinking about what I watched, I can only say one thing.


I have an opinion on the finale and what it means, but I'm going to keep it to myself. Lost has always been supremely interested in challenging its audience, so I assume different people have different reactions. I do not want to be that turd hole that rants about my thoughts on Facebook or Twitter. Nobody cares. Anyway, here are the different annoying categories of Lost fans.


1. The Know-it-All.

"Hi, I watch Lost and I have at least a bachelor's degree. Therefore, I know enough about all of the show's different themes and ideas so I can make profound statements about the show's action. Furthermore, anytime something happens that seems to be a writer's error or laziness, I am entitled to comment on it because of my education. I could write this show better than the current writers, I'm that awesome. I'm not content to seek out friends and talk about the show privately. Rather, I'd prefer to put all of my opinions out there and condescend to the writers ON THE INTERNET. Oh man, if the writers only read my Twitter account. I'd sure take them down a peg."

A few comments on the Know-it-All

-You don't know everything.
-Nobody cares about your views.
-Your views aren't always correct. There can be other interpretations of the text.
-Nobody likes you. Shut up.

2. The Spoiler.

"WOW THAT EPISODE WAS SO INTENSE! I HAVE TO VENT MY EMOTIONS ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED NOWWWWW!!! WHY ISN'T ANYONE ON GMAIL? OK, I'LL JUST POST A QUICK COMMENT ON MY FB STATUS. Should I say something like, "Lost spoiler alert"? NO because my statement is pretty vague and nobody will guess that my statement ties into hints of deaths on ads for tonight's episode. And people only watch Lost live, so there's no way I'll risk upsetting someone with Tivo/DVR/a computer with a working internet connection."

I once spoiled Lost for a friend. It was accidental, but I felt like a huge asshole after it happened. Seriously, spoiling Lost made me feel like one of the biggest douches alive. If you spoil Lost and don't feel remorse, you are Satan.

Finally, if there's a very CLEAR disclaimer about Lost spoilers, then it's less of an issue. However, doing something like, "Spoiler alert: Insert dramatic twist here!!!" doesn't count as clear because the term "spoiler alert" is vague. I don't know what you're spoiling until I read it, AND OK I'M A CURIOUS PERSON, IT'S HUMAN NATURE. I would put "Lost" in front of spoiler alert because then I can appropriately react to your spoiler alert. See how that makes it less of a problem?

A few comments on the Spoiler
-Why do you do it? Do you get some sick pleasure out of advertising how promptly you watched Lost and regurgitated the action?
-Let's look at this pro/con style. What are the benefits of spoilers? What are the potential risks of spoiling? Oh, what's that? There are zero benefits and you risk pissing off a ton of people? Super. As someone with an unhealthy tendency to read spoilers, I can safely say I've never actually enjoyed a show more as a result of knowing what happens. It's always worse.
-Nobody likes you.

3. The Over-Analyzer.

"Ok so, in episode five, season three, scene four, minute 26, Juliet goes into a house and there's a picture on the wall of Charles Darwin, which clearly means something. Since Darwin proposed a famous theory about evolution, that must relate to the island symbolically. Evolution is about organisms adapting to an environment and surviving natural selection, so obviously the writers are trying to make a profound statement about the purpose of everyone on the show. Therefore, it's logical to assume that as the show progresses, our characters will show more advanced signs of fending off natural selection. What's that? It was Ronald McDonald instead of Darwin? Well ok, then there's a strong undertone of commercialism that's permeating the show's complex narrative structure..." Blah blah blah blah douche blah blah blah blah nobody cares.

This turd needs to knock it off. What do I have to say for the Over-Analyzer?

-Your brain could be used for good. Instead, you are wasting it. Idiot.
-Your theories are probably wrong.
-More importantly, your theories probably don't matter.
-Nobody likes you.

So, I'm excited to leave these people behind, at least until the next huge pop culture phenomenon comes along.

PS I would like to point out that I gave a spoiler alert and still didn't really spoil anything. That's how protective I am of people who are still interested in watching Lost for the first time.

Rating: Lost Finale, 5/5 stars. Most people who watch Lost, 5/5 stars. A sold group of shitbag fans, 0/5 stars.

Friday, May 21, 2010

My Apologies

I'm sorry for the delay in posting. I spent most of the week trying to make an extremely important life decision, then came down with bronchitis. I feel worse than I did leaving Transformers 2. Anyway, expect a new post in the next couple of days!!

Monday, May 17, 2010

Movie Review: Robin Hood

(Picture the following in slow motion):






So, this introduction summarizes about 75% of the film. DRAMATIC BATTLE SEQUENCES!! EXTREME CLOSE UPS IN SLOW MOTION! SCREAMING!!!

It's super super super super intense, if you haven't guessed. There's just one issue. It's hard to get that invested in battle sequences when you give zero-to-few shits about the main characters. The movie doesn't do any work to establish Robin Hood or his band of merry men as figures worthy of emotional investment. Ridley Scott, surprisingly, has been very effective in this area in some of his previous films. Hell, I cared more about some of the tertiary characters in Alien than Russel Crowe's title figure. Even the biyatch that just sort of cried and screamed.

Another annoying thing is the way the movie tries to confuse you with olden-timey English language and politics. Ok, I'm sorry that I don't remember wtf was going on with France and England in the 12th century and who was king and how many evil brothers he had and which advisors were traitors. Additionally, it looks like most people in the middle ages spoke cryptically. Let me try to translate some of the movie's quotes:

Prince John: "So what would you have, a castle for every man?"
Robin Hood: "Every Englishman's home is his castle."

What. Just what. I think I sort of know what they're saying, but damnit just say it like a normal person. When the French king is asking people to speak in English for no good reason, clearly the film is pandering to it's audience. Why not clear up the bizarre English for us while you're at it? Here's my attempt at that dialog:

Prince John: "Robin Hood, stop being a bitch and tell me what you want."

See, that was the subtext of the earlier quotes.


Cate Blanchett is pretty sassy as Maid Marian...or should I say Lady Marian? They changed her from the Disney version to make her more bitchy and independent, which is the current Hollywood definition of an emancipated lady. I guess I cared about her more than Robin Hood because the movie invested approximately two minutes into her development, but I certainly didn't care very much. Screenwriters, take note. Female characters cannot be both liberated and trusting of men. At first. Be sure to write it so eventually their vaginas (vaginae?) take over and they succumb to the male's charms. If a female character is introduced and immediately strikes up a rapport with a dude, she's a slut. This is movie science. Anyway, Marian is rude at first, so she must be a strong woman.

Here are the positives of the film:

1. Oscar Isaac's first scene as Prince John. Sure, he's a Guatemalan playing English royalty, but it's fine. You'll see what I mean.
2. There's a giant white horse etched into a hill. It didn't make any sense, but I was mesmerized.
3. Max von Sydow as Nottingham's lovable village elder/blind man who sees more than most other people. BLIND CHARACTERS ALWAYS METAPHORICALLY SEE BETTER!!

Here's what I was missing:

1. Nobody ever yelled YOU SHALL NOT PASS during any of the major battle sequences. Disappointing.
2. Cate Blanchett, not once, spouted off forest widsom or had an angelic glow about her.
3. Robin's group lacked a Gimli.

So what other movie, with medieval-esque battle sequences and legitimate character development, could provide those missing items? I wonder.

Rating: 2/5 stars

Saturday, May 15, 2010

Single Review: California Gurls

Attention world! Katy Perry is back with her next single, and she's achieved self-congratulatory superstar status!! Her latest single, the obnoxiously misspelled California Gurls, is hitting the airwaves and she wants you to know one thing:

California girls are the hottest. She is a girl from California. Ergo, she is one of the hottest. This song bothers me for several reasons.

1. Katy Perry sort of looks funny. I mean, she's definitely pretty on some level, but I feel like most of it is make-up/stylists. Here's an example. Sure, she looks dolled up in the photo, but if you stare at her face long enough she looks like she's sucking on a lemon.

Anyway, I definitely don't believe that you need to be super gorgeous to be successful in the music industry. I do, however, think you need to be super gorgeous to sing a song saying you're a member of the most elite, sexually desirable women on the planet.

2. Snoop Dogg is brought in as an expert witness. He "testifies" that California girls are the hottest. Listen, that ding dong is so high that I don't think he's qualified to judge anything, let alone female attractiveness. He'd probably get a hummer from Delta Burke and not even care. I don't buy it.

3. I'm sorry. Call me an idiot, but who the hell drinks gin and juice? That's an odd mix. California girls may be beautiful, but that lyric makes them sound ass stupid. Definitely proof that the state is going through an education crisis.

4. I feel disappointed that there's nothing in the song comparing her sexual ability to an earthquake. Really really disappointed.

5. I've actually been to California and the only "California girls" I saw were lesbians and some really sassy gay men. I guess I can't properly judge the accuracy of the song since I didn't go to Southern California, but I'd rather retain my soul so that's fine.

Wow, this review really turned into a rant against Southern California. Sorry. But not really.

Rating: 3/5 stars (what can I say, it's catchy)

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

TV Review: American Idol

Alright, I did a recap of an American Idol episode, but I haven't properly reviewed the series. I guess I've been leery of doing that because this batch of contestants suck major moose cock and I didn't want to seem overly negative towards a series I once enjoyed. Well, that ship has sailed. This season of American Idol is like a big pile of elephant diarrhea, if the elephant just finished eating at White Castle.

Aside from the major lack of talent this season, I think Idol has worked really hard in recent years to destroy what once made the show great: the contestants. In the olden days, the singers had a karaoke track and a small stage. Basically, I could have filmed and produced the show in my basement. Stars were made or broken solely on vocal strength and since American Idol is a singing competition, this was great. I tuned in for the songs.

Then something odd happened midway through the series. My current theory is that the producers realized that some of the winners/successful contestants weren't making tons of money as recording artists, and so they decided to manipulate the talent pool so that the most marketable contestant won. THAT'S RIGHT, MANIPULATION. GASP!!!!! Just to make it crystal clear, you are the gentleman in the sign below:

If you aren't able to discern the manipulation, here are a few examples:

1. Anytime a contestant is a new parent, that fact is mentioned at least once an episode.
2. If a contestant has a tragic backstory, then that backstory will be brought up at least once, but could be escalated to Danny Gokey levels of obnoxious reminders. Even if the producers don't explicitly air the backstory reminder, often times it will be done indirectly. For example, one contestant sang "Jesus Take the Wheel" because it had "a lot of meaning to him" and then dressed all in white and looked to Jesus at several points during the song. WE GET IT, SHE DIED. GET OVER IT, GOKEY. Very rarely will a contestant work hard to keep their tragedy personal. David Cook did this very well in season 7, and karma rewarded him with the win. Just sayin'
3. Some contestants, no matter how well they sing, will be thrown under the bus because they're not deemed a worthy winner. For example, Syesha Mercado was never vocally terrible, but damn she couldn't catch a break from the judges to save her life. So finally, she was stuck with a song from the movie Happy Feet during the "producer's choice" round because they wanted her the fuck off the show. Even though I was never a huge Syesha fan, I can appreciate how difficult her Idol journey was.
4. Performance order. David Archuleta sang last on the first major performance night. His song choice sucked, he sounded boring on it, and forgot his words. He definitely didn't deserve to close the show (an honor that should have gone to David Cook or Carly Smithson that evening). Yet, since he was beloved by the producers, he got to do it. Going last has also helped Fantasia Barrino, Adam Lambert, Jordin Sparks, and Carrie Underwood. Yes, these examples are all very talented and perhaps deserved to win, but they producers made it EXTREMELY easy for them by placing them last. That's unfair. Especially since these contestants had most of their best performances when they weren't going last (yes, I know there are some exceptions to this)

Etc. I could go on and on about how this show is evil and the producers are determined to get what they want. In fact this season, I think the producers were so set on Crystal Bowersox winning that they didn't even put anyone else talented in the Top 24. I said it. Name another outstandingly good person. Sure, there were some promising performances from other people, but nothing incredible.

Another gripe is the four judge system. It makes the show more about the pointless criticism than the actual talent. More time is being devoted to the panel, introductions, and guest mentors and therefore less emphasis is placed on singing. In the olden days, they could do a Top 5 show where each contestant sang twice. Now, they don't sing twice until Top 3 night. Plus all of the criticism sounds the same.

For me for you, for me, for you dawg, it was just aiight. A bit pitchy in spots, but at other times you did your thing (if he's more enthusiastic, he might call it "da bomb").

Joke. I loved it.

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah artistry (although this season she's been better about fewer, and more helpful, blahs).

This is the only critique that anybody cares about, and since I've emotionally checked out I won't even put much thought into it.

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH THEY DRIVE ME NUTS! I'm ready for an all new panel. Although I'm not advocating for Paula to come back, I do think she was the best judge last season. Does that make her objectively a good judge? Hell no. She sucked. But she was still better than everyone else. Yes, America, this was the face of reason on American Idol:

Here is my five- step plan to save American Idol

1. Return to the three judge system and eliminate the judge's save. More time can go to singing, and their save does jack shit to alter the eventual winner. Or at least, knock on wood for that being true this season. Plus, the awful goodbye performances on results night will get cut off by the end credits, thank goodness. Since Simon is leaving, I advocate an entirely new panel. My vote: Shania Twain as the new Paula, Elton John as the new Simon, and someone completely different from Randy as the new Randy. Dear God do not pick Jamie Foxx. If you have to keep one judge (from Ellen, Kara, and Randy), I would say Kara. But that's a very weak endorsement.
2. Season 8 might have been one of the most talented seasons in a while. It had a Top 36, with more raw talent to choose from. Coincidence? I think not. I wish the semi-finals would allow the audience to see more contestants sing. If the producers won't increase the quantity of singing, then maybe we can try to increase the quality. Sure, some seasons have good talent with a Top 24, but this method might ensure that we don't have another season 9 shit tank on our hands.
3. I could care less about the guest mentors. Sometimes they're entertaining, but if fewer guest mentors means more singing, then get rid of those mentors. Right now.
4. Naked back-up dancers.
5. I'm on the fence about instruments. At times they're super cool, but at other times they're a crutch for less talented individuals to hobble on to the next week. Therefore, I think the producers should mandate, at the beginning of the competition, that instruments are only to be played on a select number of weeks. This will force instrument players to show off their voices. Someone like Kris Allen or Crystal Bowersox will be fine, because they have the talent, but some tard monkey, like Jason Castro or Casey James, will struggle.

Those are my thoughts. What ideas do you have to improve this poop tower?

Rating (season 9): 1/5 stars. I'm still super addicted, though.

Saturday, May 8, 2010

Movie Review: Iron Man 2

Since most of my readers are from first world countries, I assume that whoever is reading this is aware that Iron Man 2 was just released and that this was, allegedly, momentous. Well, I saw the film. I saw it at midnight. There were some children who were wearing the Iron Man mask. I saw it in IMax. I had a giant popcorn bucket. Wow I like short sentences. I admit that I have moments where I nerd out and sci-fi/action/superhero films appeal to me. So, this was the apex of nerdiness. Especially seeing the kids in masks. Then I knew I was karmically banned from sex for at least a year for accumulating a high volume of nerd points.

I would guess that my readers have already made up their minds about Iron Man 2. My opinion will probably do very little to sway things. This is good because I really don't have a strong opinion about the film. I cannot remember feeling so ambivalent after leaving a screening. Seriously, Iron Man 2 was engaging enough to hold my attention for its entire running time, but bland enough to never generate any lingering excitement. Therefore, I have made it my duty to offer some suggestions to improve Iron Man 3, because God knows that one is about as inevitable as my post Red Lobster deuce.

Suggestion 1: More Scarlett Johansson fight scenes.

Would you rather see some CGI turd man-robots fight with guns, or see Scarlett Johansson wear a body suit and beat up about fifteen armed guards using MARTIAL ARTS?!? If your answer is robots, go watch Transformers 2 and never talk to me again. Sco-Jo really kicked some butt in her one fight scene, which felt dramatically short. The audience clapped after she was done, which never happened for any of the Iron Man fights. Case closed.

Suggestion 2: Nobody gives a fuck about the imaginary science that's going on, so just leave it out.

There was this whole irrelevant storyline where Tony Stark (the main guy) had to get pallidiaminium because the current element fueling his body was galvonicating his q-cells too quickly and therefore the floconium levels in his blood were too high and he was going to die. Or something. Did this play into the main storyline? No. Did this have a socially relevant point? No. Did it serve to create any dramatic tension? No, because we knew he wouldn't die. Are any of the words in the first sentence of this section real? No.

Suggestion 3: Incorporate this guy, just because I think it would be funny.

Suggestion 4: Don't try so hard to be funny

Yes, I think humor is great and many times the movie successfully pulled it off. However, there were lots of really lame puns. Since I can't remember any of them specifically and because I'm adequate at writing bad jokes, I will simulate some of those lines here

Guy 1: Wow, looks like we made short work of these robots!
Guy 2: Yeah, looks like someone's going back to the junkyard!!! HAR HAR!

(after dousing someone with water)
Guy 1: Why did you douse me with water?!?
Guy 2: We were arguing. I thought you needed to COOL DOWN!

Hot lady: I need you to sign this form, Mr. Important.
Mr. Important: Ok, and maybe later I can sign YOUR form with my dick! And by form, I mean your vagina.

You get the point. Try harder, writers.

Suggestion 5: More nudity. But only from hot people. Mickey Rourke is not acceptable. I have no urge to see him in tighty whities again, because retaining the ability to see is important to me.

Suggestion 6: Betty White cameo. If you find someone that doesn't think favorably of Betty White, I will spend a full $10 at White Castle and eat everything I buy. You know that's a risky endeavor. And yes, I say this because I just watched the Betty White SNL. It was solid.

Suggestion 7: Arbitrarily recast the black guy role. The studio already did this in between the first two movies. Why not do it again? A good portion of white people won't even notice. I recommend Kenan Thompson.

Alright, that's all for me. I'm going to rewatch Maya Rudolph's Whitney Houston impression from SNL. SHOOP!

Rating: 2.5/5 stars

Thursday, May 6, 2010

Movie Review: Nightmare on Elm Street

Have you ever gone to a restaurant and had a dish that you really liked? Duh, of course you have. So let's say, hypothetically, that you go to a Mexican restaurant and have a delicious chimichanga. Sure, it's kind of cheesy, but you appreciate the ingenious idea of deep-frying a burrito. And who are you kidding, you like the cheese too, even if it's not good for you. Then, you read in the newspaper that the restaurant is coming out with a newer, sexier, more modern version of the chimichanga. You're so excited you can barely wait to get to the restaurant. The chimichanga was so genius, how could this go wrong?!? When you go, you order the remade chimichanga, only to find that there's very little cheese and instead of being filled with grilled chicken or beef, it's filled with rotting baby diarrhea.


Let me begin by describing why the original Nightmare on Elm Street was so ROFLawesome and then I'll talk about why the new one is terrible. The first one is great because the concept was fucking genius AND it was executed well. I mean, you have to give Wes Craven a good deal of credit for coming up with the idea of a murderer who kills people in their dreams. Everyone has nightmares! Rich people! Poor people! Stupid people! Ponies! Everyone. So immediately everyone can relate to this concept on some level. Here's how the movie brainstorming for the original went:

Wes: Hey, let's have a murderer kill people in their sleep!

Studio Dude: Wow, that's a really great idea. However, how can we make this terrifying and still have a good story structure?

Wes: Well, since the idea of a dream killer is a bit fantastical, let's have the protagonist try desperately to stay awake. As the madness of insomnia sets in, there will be a subtle uncertainty as to whether or not the events of the movie are really happening, or if they're merely a byproduct of our character's unraveling imagination. As the character deduces what is happening, we should have other tertiary characters constantly question our protagonist's sanity.

Studio Dude: Nice. Hopefully we won't have to work too hard to create a frightening atmosphere. We'll make the audience invested in our main character, so most of the fear comes from not wanting her to fall asleep. It would probably bastardize everything we've worked to build if we let this movie devolve into a lazy, one-note slasher movie, where we're interested in making loud noises to scare the audience.

Wes: Word.

Yeah, so the original Nightmare had good plot development and the movie was much more disgusting and unsettling that this new cock-show. Freddy was more interested in creating a haunting dream environment and psychologically scarring our heroes. New Freddy likes to jump out of nowhere and make noises. Not necessary.

Well, let's play out the conversation that went into planning the new Nightmare.


Exec 2: Don't we all. How can we make it?

Exec 1: Duh let's totes remake Nightmare on Elm Street. We've remade everything else, why not remake this one.

Exec 2: Aiight, but modern audiences are more cynical. If we have a nightmarish dream murder villain, we should really spend an exorbitant amount of time trying to figure out who he is, why he is a killer, and how deeply he is connected to our main character. That way, our audience will buy it.

Exec 1: Um, that in now way explains how he's able to kill people in their dreams, just why he's a killer. I feel like you're not solving the problem.

Exec 2: MONEY.

Exec 1: SOLD. Let's do this.

Exec 2: Just to be clear, we're going to take all of the unsettling atmosphere of the original and replace it with unnecessary back story and really cheap, lazy scares.

Exec 1: Yeah, and let's not even try to get the audience to care about the characters. OOOOH ANOTHER IDEA! Let's do a dream sequence every three minutes. Scare scare scare scare scare scare. That way we won't have to hire a good plot screenwriter AND it'll make it easier to avoid character development. We can also make a lot of the dreams look just like real life, so Freddy can just pop out and scare people randomly! Fuck you, nightmare concept. Fuck you. Money.

Exec 2: In fact, let's invoke some bullshit scenario where people can dream without even falling asleep so Freddy can pop out at any time!!! Nothing that worked about the original will be in our movie!! The audience won't even care that our characters could fall asleep because THEY'RE SLEEPING ALREADY!!

I think you get my point. The new movie basically shat on everything that was good about the original, just for the sake of my money. By the way, here's the Elm Street Poster:

Rating: 1.5/5 stars

Tuesday, May 4, 2010

Single Review: Can't Be Tamed

Since the dawn of time, women have learned that they can get more attention by turning into big slutbombs. This may come as a surprise, but this trend commonly occurs in the music industry. Madonna did it. Britney did it. Christina did it and then did it a second time. Ke$ha started there. You see my point. Well, it seems that Miley Cyrus is the next in line to "grow up," which is a music-industry synonym with stripping (for ladies because guys don't have to do that to establish legitimacy).

The biggest different between Miley and these other ladies is the fact that she's ONLY SEVENTEEN. Although her music video for Can't Be Tamed is still pending, there's a good chance that I'll go to jail for a sex crime by watching it. Sure, seventeen is legal in most areas. However, it's still super creepy everywhere. I don't care how good the song is, that doesn't eliminate the weird undertone of pedophilia for anyone that's over 21.

Oh, guess what bitches, THAT WAS A SEGUE. The song isn't that good. Normally I'm down with songs being overproduced, but this one is shameless about it. I actually think Miley has a pretty good singing voice, so it sucks that she's masking it with some sort of autotune effect. The writing is pretty shitty also. It sounds like she's either moving towards rap language or she's partially forgotten English. It works on someone like Lil' Wayne but Miley can't quite cut it. Here's a sample:

For those who don't know me I can get to be crazy
Have to get my way ya
Twenty four hours a day
Cause I'm hot like that

Every guy everywhere just gives me mad attention
Like I'm under inspection
Always gets a ten
Cause I'm built like that

I go through guys like money flying out the hands
They try to change me but they realize they can't
And every tomorrow is a day I never plan
If you're gonna be my man understand

I can't be tamed
I can't be tamed
I can't be blamed
I can't can't I can't can't be tamed

Yep, so that's the first part of the song. Essentially, she wants a guy who accepts that she is an untamed megaslut. Guys try to change her (aka make her pull up her panties every now and then) and she freaks out because they're trying to "tame" her. Listen, I'm all for female empowerment and whatnot, but when the message is "I'm so frigging hot I can do whatever I want to guys and not have consequences" then I start to work about twelve year old girls with gonorrhea. This is how I imagine a conversation with a nice guy and untamed Miley.

Guy: Hey Miley, do you want to go on a date tonight?


Guy:...Um ok. So I'll pick you up at eight then. We can go to a nice Italian restaurant.


Guy: Well, I don't really have the money for sushi. Are you sure you won't give Italian a try?


Guy: Alright, I guess another time. PS I can see your vagina in those shorts. You're clearly not grown up yet.

And scene.

So yeah, this is bad. It's like this bad:

Ugh. I'm just going to listen to Xanadu now.

Rating: 1.5/5 stars

UPDATE! After watching the video, the song is growing on me. It's trashy awfulness is becoming endearing. I'd up the rating to 2.5 or 3 stars. I'm sorry I put up the National Treasure 2 poster. But I'm not taking it down because I still think it's funny.

Monday, May 3, 2010

Sunday, May 2, 2010

TV Review: Friday Night Lights

Ok, so I promise a movie review is coming this week. It probably seems like I watch a million tv shows and don't do anything else, but that is only about 85% accurate. In the meantime, here's ANOTHER tv review.

So, I spent a lot of time today sitting on my couch and watching Netflix Streaming. For anyone who doesn't have Netflix, get it RIGHT NOW because Netflix Streaming is quickly becoming the greatest thing of all time. All seven seasons of Buffy are on Netflix Streaming so the assgroove on my couch is slowly going to get permanent. Anyway, when I wasn't supplementing my daily calorie intake with root beer I was watching Friday Night Lights. Friday Night Lights is frigging awesome and that fact surprised me quite a bit. Here's why I was apprehensive:

1. It takes place in rural Texas. I would probably get murdered there.
2. It's about football, which means it's not about eating and therefore is outside of my wheelhouse.
3. It airs on NBC, which is only good at comedies. Name a good drama. I dare you. The Biggest Loser doesn't count because it's reality tv.

However, this show is great. LIST TIME! Here are the good things:

1. It's really more of a family/high school drama. Did you hear that? High school drama.
2. To clarify my last point, there are irresponsible teenagers who are sexually promiscuous. Vicarious is the first word that comes into my mind.
3. Tim Riggins.
4. Connie Britton is probably the greatest actress on TV, so I'm praying my opinion of her doesn't change when I watch the Nightmare on Elm Street remake.
5. I actually know things about football, thank you very much. Watch this: touchdown, field goal, first down, interception, tackle, pigskin, snap, lineman, etc. BOOYAH. This isn't like the sport stick disc where all I can think is "net guardian" and "puck transfer."

I've come this far without putting a picture in the post. I guess this will have to be a non sequitur because I'm only running on root beer and chicken crispies.

FROG CAT TO THE RESCUE! Aka rescuing this post from being completely blah.

I think this might be the listiest list post of all time, so bear with one more list. Let me list the things that I would do to convince you to watch Friday Night Lights. List. List List. List.

1. Defecate on the personal property of someone you greatly dislike.
2. Swear off shorts unless I get some serious amounts of sun exposure.
3. Fold your laundry. This might not seem like much, but given that I'll sleep next to my unfolded laundry for weeks this is a big deal.
4. Edit a long paper that you're writing because I have really good editing skills and can easily pick up on even the smallest of errors or help with your sentence structure because good clear succinct sentences are the best.
5. Write you some customized, sassy one-liners to bust out at any point. "Wow, your current outfit makes crocs with socks look fashionable." "I would rather poop a baseball than continue this current conversation with you." "Ha. I wouldn't eat that even if it were drenched in nacho cheese." Yeah, just imagine how good they'll be when I put effort into them.

So, please watch this show or you'll have to face the wrath of PSYCHO KITTY

Who wants to see this guy and Frog Cat duke it out? Maybe that'll be my next Pitch Idea post.

Rating: 5/5 stars